Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

wiki is wonky

Options
  • 22-10-2011 12:33am
    #1
    Kadongy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭


    it won't worky
    Post edited by Shield on


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    El Weirdo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,646 ✭✭✭✭El Weirdo


    Yeah. Noticed that the other day.


  • Options
    #3
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    I mentioned this in the Mods Forum earlier. Hopefully it's okay for me to relay the gist of what I was told!

    The Biki had been up and down every so often for about a year.

    From what I've been told, it was stored on a wonky old computer that finally kicked the bucket a few weeks ago.

    The code/info/etc is probably still salvageable, but someone will have to give the Site Development team a damn good reason before they'll be able to allocate any time to it.


  • Options
    #4
    Kadongy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭Kadongy


    three uses of the word wonky in four posts. Brilliant :)

    If the hard disk isn't broken they could just take it out and put it in an enclosure and -voila! That time being allocated to it isn't very much compared to the hundreds of hours that went into the collective content. But I guess this isn't directly money-generating and therefore is being ignored.


  • Options
    #5
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,280 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    It's more that there are a lot of resources being expended on specific development projects and this just doesn't appear on the to-do list for the time being. It's not to say that it will never be fixed, but there are many far higher priority tasks to be completed before it could be tackled.


  • Options
    #6
    Kadongy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭Kadongy


    Are the specific development projects expected to generate revenue? :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Boards.ie: Danny
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,609 ✭✭✭Boards.ie: Danny


    Kadongy wrote: »
    Are the specific development projects expected to generate revenue? :D

    Aren't they all? :)

    Zaph & Insect Overlord are correct. The server that ran the Boards Wiki, Blogs, Journals.ie, Tweet.ie etc died about two months ago. As pointed out here there are a lot of changes going on with Boards at the minute and there's a new development team (me included) settling in.

    There are no immediate plans to bring any of the sites on the dead server back online, we've got bigger issues like ensuring the stability, availability and further development of the more important core sites - like Boards.ie ;)


  • Options
    #8
    Kadongy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭Kadongy


    Boards.ie: Danny wrote: »
    Aren't they all? :)

    Zaph & Insect Overlord are correct. The server that ran the Boards Wiki, Blogs, Journals.ie, Tweet.ie etc died about two months ago. As pointed out here there are a lot of changes going on with Boards at the minute and there's a new development team (me included) settling in.

    There are no immediate plans to bring any of the sites on the dead server back online, we've got bigger issues like ensuring the stability, availability and further development of the more important core sites - like Boards.ie ;)
    Well the site started off as a community-focused endeavour, with revenue generation appearing to be just a way of supporting that. Now it seems like a revenue-generating endeavour, with community focus just being a way of supporting that.

    The funny thing is that there were less bugs when it was more community-focused and didn't have paid staff. Not making jibes at anyone's competence, but rather the effect of the change of focus. Adding features to make money is the important thing. Fixing basic functionality is secondary.


  • Options
    #9
    TouchingVirus
    Registered Users Posts: 8,584 ✭✭✭TouchingVirus


    Kadongy wrote: »
    The funny thing is that there were less bugs when it was more community-focused and didn't have paid staff. Not making jibes at anyone's competence, but rather the effect of the change of focus. Adding features to make money is the important thing. Fixing basic functionality is secondary.

    Seriously? You have to be joking .Less bugs? No. I'm going to take it that you're not a boards user who's only been around since February '11, so do you not remember when boards went down before Daft/Distilled Media it was down for hours or days? Now boards is rarely down and when it is it's usually nowhere near as long offline. One of the first things that was done when Boards got funding was to get rid of the old dodgy hardware and buy new stuff to keep the site going - that's how bad it was. Touch, and the underlying technology that enables it, is only possible and so good at what it does because of the employees. The increase of the boards.ie profile so that we've got Talk To forums for major companies on the doorstep, boardsdeals(?), hell even adverts.ie is in a way all down to the employees/improved business end of Boards.

    All of this, and all of the other stuff that may be planned down the line, is only possible because Boards got invested in. Anybody who invests capital wants a return on their investment, and I don't believe the return on that investment is hampering any community-based improvements. Just because a project is expected to generate revenue doesn't mean it doesn't benefit the community - the two are not mutually exclusive, as touch proves (adverts on touch provide revenue I'm guessing).

    In contrast to touch - the wiki was a niche thing that was a hotbed for spam according to Conor and I must have visited it about 20 times in all the time it was online. Personally I never like the wiki, it took stuff from boards and put it into wiki articles - isn't that what threads & search are for? Or even ideas like the "List of legendary boards threads" in AH? I only ever used Tweet.ie when Boards went offline and I never used Journals.ie/boards.co.uk/boards.cn or whatever other sites disappeared when that machine crashed. I suspect that I wasn't alone in my pattern of usage given the lack of copious threads in Site Development or here about the sites being offline.

    I don't consider the wiki "basic functionality" as much as I consider it a failed experiment.


  • Options
    #10
    Kadongy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭Kadongy


    TouchingVirus wrote: »
    Seriously? You have to be joking .Less bugs? No. I'm going to take it that you're not a boards user who's only been around since February '11, so do you not remember when boards went down before Daft/Distilled Media it was down for hours or days? Now boards is rarely down and when it is it's usually nowhere near as long offline. One of the first things that was done when Boards got funding was to get rid of the old dodgy hardware and buy new stuff to keep the site going - that's how bad it was. Touch, and the underlying technology that enables it, is only possible and so good at what it does because of the employees. The increase of the boards.ie profile so that we've got Talk To forums for major companies on the doorstep, boardsdeals(?), hell even adverts.ie is in a way all down to the employees/improved business end of Boards.

    All of this, and all of the other stuff that may be planned down the line, is only possible because Boards got invested in. Anybody who invests capital wants a return on their investment, and I don't believe the return on that investment is hampering any community-based improvements. Just because a project is expected to generate revenue doesn't mean it doesn't benefit the community - the two are not mutually exclusive, as touch proves (adverts on touch provide revenue I'm guessing).

    In contrast to touch - the wiki was a niche thing that was a hotbed for spam according to Conor and I must have visited it about 20 times in all the time it was online. Personally I never like the wiki, it took stuff from boards and put it into wiki articles - isn't that what threads & search are for? Or even ideas like the "List of legendary boards threads" in AH? I only ever used Tweet.ie when Boards went offline and I never used Journals.ie/boards.co.uk/boards.cn or whatever other sites disappeared when that machine crashed. I suspect that I wasn't alone in my pattern of usage given the lack of copious threads in Site Development or here about the sites being offline.

    I don't consider the wiki "basic functionality" as much as I consider it a failed experiment.
    Good post.

    Wasn't really referring to the wiki as basic functionality - apart from the dead link to it in the drop downs. I've seen a number of issues with search features and also forums missing from the dropdowns. These are what I was thinking of as basic functionality. You are right about there being less downtime though. Afaik the nightly downtime at 4am is no longer required also.

    Not surprised at the spam thing. I had a wiki online before myself and the amount of spam it got was unreal, considering it wasnt even a hugely popular website or anything! That's a very different (and more compelling) argument though to saying there is no time to put it back up.

    Touch is good too yeah :)


Advertisement